ashkenn wrote:KO: No, you are mixing up the practise. The preliminary stage is fixing on the breath, breath in long and short. It is always said that after fixing on the breath, one attains jhanas. Then the jhanas is a basis for insight which is the understanding of nama and rupa. You think you are ready to do breathing meditation?

CheersKen O

I do not agree with that commenterial statement about counting the breaths. The suttas do not ask one to count the breath, the breath isn't the sole object of concentration either.

Recently for sitting sessions I am doing more of present-moment awareness of ever changing namarupa. The breath comes up by itself, for alive people it almost always is present. Even when one pays attention to the breath, the feelings, perceptions, volitions, cognition and bare physical feeling IS STILL PRESENT THERE. So one does do satipatthana while doing anapanasati.

I don't believe in Hindu practices of counting the breath, or controlling the breath, or numbing down the mind to stick only to the breath.

"And how is mindfulness of in-&-out breathing developed & pursued so as to bring the four frames of reference to their culmination?

"[1] On whatever occasion a monk breathing in long discerns, 'I am breathing in long'; or breathing out long, discerns, 'I am breathing out long'; or breathing in short, discerns, 'I am breathing in short'; or breathing out short, discerns, 'I am breathing out short'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&... out sensitive to the entire body'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out calming bodily fabrication': On that occasion the monk remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. I tell you, monks, that this — the in-&-out breath — is classed as a body among bodies, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.

"[3] On whatever occasion a monk trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out sensitive to the mind'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out satisfying the mind'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out steadying the mind'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out releasing the mind': On that occasion the monk remains focused on the mind in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. I don't say that there is mindfulness of in-&-out breathing in one of lapsed mindfulness and no alertness, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on the mind in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.

"[4] On whatever occasion a monk trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on inconstancy'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on dispassion'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on cessation'; trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out focusing on relinquishment': On that occasion the monk remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world. He who sees with discernment the abandoning of greed & distress is one who watches carefully with equanimity, which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on mental qualities in & of themselves — ardent, alert, & mindful — putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."

I do not want to debate about commentarian text because people nowadays thinks their understanding is better than the ancient masters. I remember I did tell you before if they are not Buddha dhamma will the 3rd council of Arahants endorsed it. That is in the 500 years where true dhamma exists.

Ok lets use the sutta wordings. <<which is why the monk on that occasion remains focused on the body in & of itself — ardent, alert, & mindful>> you are not focus, you jump into nama and rupa. So the text tell you to remain until <<putting aside greed & distress with reference to the world.>> , you did not and that is not possible if the hindrances are not suppressed. Have you achieve that before you go to feelings

Because in the start of feelings <<On whatever occasion a monk trains himself, 'I will breathe in...&...out sensitive to rapture';>> when do we start having rapture, isn't it at the jhanas level

Are the vipassana techniques, taught through the Mahasi & Goenka centres, relatively new inventions based on commentarial works? ...................................................... That is why I ask if these techniques are relatively new.

Metta

Hi

BTW ......No Mahayana sutras allowed to "prove" lineage!

I'm sorry, but who made you a moderator?

I might apply

Ok since I am not moderator you can use as many Mahayana sutras as you like.

Just a shot in the dark here, but maybe because there are five Nikayas.

By the by, don't go claiming a lack of authenticity for either the Khuddaka or Digha Nikayas (a presumption on my part as to why you're saying there are only four, but maybe it's just a mistake on your part). Also, let's not forget that a lot of good comes from comparing the Nikayas to the parallels in the Agamas.

Last, saying that the Nikayas are the end-all be-all of the DhammaVinaya is also, you know, ignoring the entire Vinaya.

You may have issues with Mahayana Sutras, but let's not go swinging all the way to Nikaya Fundamentalism, eh?

Just a shot in the dark here, but maybe because there are five Nikayas.

By the by, don't go claiming a lack of authenticity for either the Khuddaka or Digha Nikayas (a presumption on my part as to why you're saying there are only four, but maybe it's just a mistake on your part). Also, let's not forget that a lot of good comes from comparing the Nikayas to the parallels in the Agamas.

Last, saying that the Nikayas are the end-all be-all of the DhammaVinaya is also, you know, ignoring the entire Vinaya.

You may have issues with Mahayana Sutras, but let's not go swinging all the way to Nikaya Fundamentalism, eh?

P.S.

'Spelt' isn't a correct conjugation of the infinitive 'to spell'.

There is a lot of true Dhamma in the Khuddaka Nikaya but also some that is not. The four nikayas are the bedrock.'Spelt' isn't a correct conjugation of the infinitive 'to spell' - and your point is? If we are to be vetted on our spelling - I wish somebody had told me I am not ignoring the Vinaya - that is more a monks concern, than it is mine.

Brizzy wrote:There is a lot of true Dhamma in the Khuddaka Nikaya but also some that is not. The four nikayas are the bedrock.

So you've read the whole Khuddaka? Which parts are, in your opinion, not Saddhamma? Maybe you could start a new thread on it, because once I finish the Anguttara that was next, and if you can trim out the fat I'd greatly appreciate it.

Brizzy wrote:'Spelt'... - and your point is?

Simple, that 'spelt' isn't a word. I thought you might like to know - I had to find out once, too.

Brizzy wrote:p.s. I did not do a spell check or grammar check

I didn't mention anything about spelling or grammar. I mentioned that you'd used a word which isn't an actual word.

Brizzy wrote:There is a lot of true Dhamma in the Khuddaka Nikaya but also some that is not. The four nikayas are the bedrock.

So you've read the whole Khuddaka? Which parts are, in your opinion, not Saddhamma? Maybe you could start a new thread on it, because once I finish the Anguttara that was next, and if you can trim out the fat I'd greatly appreciate it.

I think your kidding me

Brizzy wrote:'Spelt'... - and your point is?

Simple, that 'spelt' isn't a word. I thought you might like to know - I had to find out once, too.

Ok, thank you very much, your attention to detail is appreciated

Brizzy wrote:p.s. I did not do a spell check or grammar check

I didn't mention anything about spelling or grammar. I mentioned that you'd used a word which isn't an actual word.

Brizzy wrote:.I have always thought (not always that there was a touch of the jains/niganthas in the modern day vipassana techniques. The emphasis on what amounts to deliberately induced pain is reminiscent of ascetic practices of old, as if somehow you can burn up old kamma, through pain, (like the draining of a battery/quite ridiculous!). That is why I ask if these techniques are relatively new.

Show us with quotes from these teachers that you are accurately reflecting them with this statement.

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond.SN I, 38.

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

Brizzy wrote:If one was to recollect that they were once a child - and that they will surely die - and all the change in between. Is this not knowing and seeing anicca of the senses/aggregates etc .- its rising/passing away and its subject to change? Investigating the conditions for their arising/passing, is the second of the enlightenment factors. No"special" practice is indicated. If one one is following these special vipassana practices, how is one actually knowing & seeing the eye as impermanent? If one is labeling a certain thing, how is this being aware of its origin, change and cessation?The buddha gave a wide range of recollections(sati) that could be used regarding the body e.g. parts of the body, cemetery, food etc. A large part of the myriad of suttas the Buddha taught are all ways & means for the arising of the enlightenment factors. Even the "perception" of the not self, is a practice to be thought through/recollected/perceived. The perception of Dukkha, does not mean one has to generate pain, before one can know & see the characteristic of Dukkha. I know I am rambling, but it is hard sometimes to express what one actually means. That is why the four Nikayas are so precious, the Buddha taught them so clearly.:-

The first & last suttas are two of the very few occassions that the Buddha got specific about a laypersons formal meditation.

Interesting comments, Brizzy.

With metta,

Alex

"Life is a struggle. Life will throw curveballs at you, it will humble you, it will attempt to break you down. And just when you think things are starting to look up, life will smack you back down with ruthless indifference..."